3 ms·

I suggest then that what you have isn't a process. McDonalds has a process. The process makes it so that no matter which McDonalds you go to, you always get the

I suggest then that what you have isn't a process. McDonalds has a process. The process makes it so that no matter which McDonalds you go to, you always get the same food. If your "process" works differently with different people, what you have is indistinguishable from not having a process.

feyn 10y ago
Your point is difficult to refute. My thought is as follows: McDonalds is designed around the core idea that people are fungible and that mediocrity is optimal result (by "mediocrity" I mean no better, but no worse than the average hamburger). I do not believe that software development resources are fungible due to the high degree of creativity and independent decision making required to strike the best balance of quality and time-to-market, and often mediocre results can hurt companies during critical stages of growth. With that in mind, do we then say "If resources are not fungible and results cannot be mediocre then process cannot exist"? My answer is "no." A lack of resource fungibility does demand an individualized approach to training new resources on the process as it exists at a point in time, but provided resources do not change, the process itself should not change much outside of evidence-based optimization, i.e. "this ain't workin' so we better change somethin'" To me, process is about expectation management. Every other aspect of a process is in support of maintaining or exceeding expectations. I believe that if a process is so catered to individual whims that no expectations can be reliably set, then there isn't a process. Having said that, I do believe you can achieve a relatively consistent level of meeting and/or exceeding expectations with a process customized to the individual needs of the team members. Still, your point is very valid. Mine were only additional thoughts inspired by your astute observation.
matwood 10y ago
McDonalds is closer to a factory process, and has little to do with software development. For years, factory processes have been applied to software development and for years projects are late, over budget, and never delivered. I see agile as more a meta process. A process to build a process from. Agile attempts to accept the reality of the world that people are different, teams are different, and projects are different. It even describes the retrospective as a way to change the process so that it works better for a team. Over time different teams should end up with the agile process that works best for them.

feyn 10y ago

Your point is difficult to refute. My thought is as follows: McDonalds is designed around the core idea that people are fungible and that mediocrity is optimal result (by "mediocrity" I mean no better, but no worse than the average hamburger). I do not believe that software development resources are fungible due to the high degree of creativity and independent decision making required to strike the best balance of quality and time-to-market, and often mediocre results can hurt companies during critical stages of growth. With that in mind, do we then say "If resources are not fungible and results cannot be mediocre then process cannot exist"? My answer is "no." A lack of resource fungibility does demand an individualized approach to training new resources on the process as it exists at a point in time, but provided resources do not change, the process itself should not change much outside of evidence-based optimization, i.e. "this ain't workin' so we better change somethin'" To me, process is about expectation management. Every other aspect of a process is in support of maintaining or exceeding expectations. I believe that if a process is so catered to individual whims that no expectations can be reliably set, then there isn't a process. Having said that, I do believe you can achieve a relatively consistent level of meeting and/or exceeding expectations with a process customized to the individual needs of the team members. Still, your point is very valid. Mine were only additional thoughts inspired by your astute observation.

matwood 10y ago

McDonalds is closer to a factory process, and has little to do with software development. For years, factory processes have been applied to software development and for years projects are late, over budget, and never delivered. I see agile as more a meta process. A process to build a process from. Agile attempts to accept the reality of the world that people are different, teams are different, and projects are different. It even describes the retrospective as a way to change the process so that it works better for a team. Over time different teams should end up with the agile process that works best for them.